Picking your poison

From Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core
Jump to: navigation, search

"The best way to control any individual in the Information Age is via temptation into self-discreditation."

Preface: As noted below, the "poison" needn't be anything even slightly related to national-socialism, white-nationalism, or targeted toward whites in particular; there are hundreds of offered flavors for you to choose from and sicken yourself with. (The kind that converts its drinkers into Nazis is merely one of the most potent.)

~ ~ ~

An essay on the tar pit of "Holocaust revisionism" (among other primary symptoms of the death-clutch of national socialism), and why no good can come of it no matter what the truth is because the whole thing is poisonous salted ground, and, it is argued, by design, to entrap and ensnare. The discussion below is lifted verbatim from the 2018 Infogalactic talk page of David Irving.


Picking your poison

The most important (indeed, circa 2018, only) lingering effect of the Holocaust is how debate surrounding it has resulted in "hate speech" legislation that has now snowballed to encompass nearly everything, converted Europe into a dictatorship, and is currently making serious tilts at the 1st Amendment in the last-bastion United States. Thought experiment: Envision said legislation not evolving by happenstance, but by concerted and careful planning over many, many decades. What would it take for such legislation to come into being? What would its proposers need to make it happen? To get it accepted by legislatures and passed into law?

What they need is political kayfabe, or a managed environment in which heroes and villains are shaped in the public consciousness. It then does not matter who the spectator gets behind, only that he buys a ticket for the match convinced that he's seeing a real contest.

To accept this thesis, one needs to make a tiny leap of faith: Assume you're being lied to. I assume that I am being lied to constantly: children lie, cops lies, teachers lie, journalists lie, coworkers lie, spouses lie, in-laws lie, bosses lie, employees lie, your best friends lie. Politicking is synonymous with lying. The purpose of a lie is to obtain what the truth will not provide, with less effort than overt coercion. The biggest liars of course are those working toward power, or being paid to groom those already in it. Therefore, any activity or topic involved in securing power, and marginalizing anyone else on the scene, is marinated in lies, and those lies are stacked up in a giant cake with more than layers than anyone can count. Even the most jaded and cynical of us err in underestimating the depth of the lying.

So, what pastry chef is capable of this? And, how does it manage to get away with it? --Simple: free smorgasbord, and everybody picks their own poison (it's important that each diner assume he's discovering the meal for himself). What poison the citizen picks is unimportant; what matters is that he nurses it for the rest of his life like a tamagotchi he's utterly devoted to, wastes endless amounts of time on, and will always have a lingering soft spot for even after thoroughly deceased and tossed in a drawer. What makes for the best poison? Whatever appeals to our evolutionary taste-buds. Barely descended from trees, tribalist sentiments are always popular because there is purportedly strength in numbers and our egos are easily stroked when personal failures or plain bad luck can be written off as actually due to enemy action by others who don't look the same. And, as always, people love to get something for free, and even better if they think it'll come from someone they hate...been trained to hate.

How does that cottage-industry known as "Holocaust denial" fit into this? Take Joe Blow, your hard-working white male dude, making money and getting taxed and swindled accordingly in The Land of the Free where he should seemingly be cock-of-the-walk. Odds are poor that he'll submit to this abuse his entire life, and from the perspective of the powers that be living at his expense, he may eventually be a threat active in politics in an attempt to end the predations. Therefore, that threat-potential must be neutered. The best way to control any individual in the Information Age is via temptation into self-discreditation, causing him to instantly implode should he ever set foot on the campaign trail.

People tend toward simplicity: their thinking is binary, yin-yang, hero/villain. Feed the people a bad guy, and they'll clamor for laws to keep him in line, rock-head stupid to the prospect of them being who'll be kept in line by the new law. If you're a bad guy yourself, you need a worse guy to take the heat off you and cast yourself as a hero opposing. So, who make good villains? Well, there's no doubt that Nazis make good villains. But with the originals long dead in the war or wheezing in nursing-homes, what to do? Solution: make new ones. (Fakes can do the job, too, but there's the constant annoyance of having to pay them as well as ensure they don't have a crisis of conscience.)

Holocaust denial is a rabbit hole you're supposed to fall down and waste years of your life mired in, each hole similar to thousands of others, intertwined and interconnected in an endless real-life open-world mmorpg with new updates published monthly for decades on end. After a time inside this chrysalis, you'll emerge as a caterpillar transformed into an easily-downvotable person who'll never be a contender with class. But if you're really special, you'll get a swastika tattoo and start complaining on the internet about how Jews control everything and are bent on destroying the white race. At that point, you're the perfect golden heel who'll then be made infamous across a thousand SJW Twatter and Wikigasms and used to justify all manner of legislation.

What is the truth, then? --The truth is the one thing that is never discussed in mainstream or alternative media. If it's talked about, at all, it's probably poison (a lie of some type). For example, in The Great Weinstein Overthrows of 2017+, almost without exception every one of the deposed was a white male who just so happened to also be Jewish, this latter aspect discussed nowhere while the official media narrative was one of groping perverts finally being spitted and women breathing free as the glass-ceiling shattered, while the alt-media narrative was one of SJWs run amok. The puzzle piece of religious unanimity and what that portended was ignored: Something *orchestrated* was obviously going on, but no one was talking about it. Not CNN, not NYT, not Alex Jones, not WikiLeaks, not RT. The piece didn't fit any peddled narrative, so it was ignored. Or suppressed, if one be conspiratorially-minded.

--If a jigsaw puzzle piece isn't fitting into the puzzle, most set the piece aside, assuming it's a false piece or that it goes somewhere else. But the reality is that the piece is not false. The still-unfinished puzzle, as built so far, is what is false. Some of those dogs aren't in right-side-up. To be successfully completed, it must be torn apart and restarted from scratch. But it is human-nature to cling to and defend labors already undertaken, to "throw good money after bad", and so most persons are stuck with an incomplete, false puzzle, and are conditioned to ignoring "inconvenient" pieces that do not fit.

I'm an older fart now. Been around. Closet full of 'done-it' T-shirts. Am here to tell you: I have torn apart that fuckin' puzzle so many times to restart that you wouldn't believe it.

The only puzzle I've seen into which all pieces fit is this: the Shadow Party is very real, very old, and very experienced in using the truth to crush the lies it has fed those who might potentially oppose it. Like The Many-Faced God, it knows what's true, what's false, and where and when you first ate its poisoned candy, and will mercilessly whip you to the floor when it catches you regurgitating its own propaganda. --Froglich 19:11, 7 May 2018

Irving as part of the controlled opposition?

I am failing to see how this is relevant to a discussion of whether or not to call David Irving a Holocaust Denier. If questioning the 4M number the Soviets first claimed, or the 3M number that was probably put into Höss' mouth then it seems that even the NY Times and all those who have claimed it is 1.5M or 1.1M or the more recent claims of ~750,000 that I have seen must be regarded as Holocaust Deniers. -- Crew (talk) 16:16, 9 May 2018
It really doesn't matter what the number is, so long as the answer is still "a lot". What matters is how much time the poison-candy-eater devotes to a "lost cause" with over a half-century of taint around it, and how public perception of that cause is used to crush them. --You pick your battles with a preference toward those which are temporarily relevant and potentially winnable. The Third Reich is not relevant, and salvaging its reputation is neither a winnable project nor useful. Who rules today is what is relevant.
I'll reiterate my conclusion that Irving is a self-aware political kayfabe "heel" serving the Shadow Party agenda. His job is to suck in perfectly good white boys and throw them in the trash while stoking Marxist class-struggle and race-warfare narratives. And of course he's going to boast about his Rolls-Royce, because cultivating an aura of unremitting repulsiveness is the stagecraft of a professional heel. --Froglich 20:16, 9 May 2018
The claim that Irving works to divert right-wing dissidents into an "intellectual dead end" of Holocaust revisionism in order to discredit and thereby neutralize them should definitely be prominently mentioned in his article. -- Jack-arcalon (talk) 18:08, 10 May 2018
I'm not aware of any "reliable source" (or otherwise) that could prove that conjecture. I simply observe that such a hypothesis is a puzzle piece that solidly clinks into place like Thanos dropping a power-stone into his glove. What many do not understand is that Shadow Party penetration of the ostensible "right" is as thorough as it is the Left, because "left" and "right" are a false-dichotomy anyway, existing to create division and distraction. The only political spectrum that matters is liberty <-> tyranny.
In the end, a Third Reich that kills several hundred-thousand instead of millions after revised counting isn't going to be held any better in the hindsight of those who, in the 21st Century, still differentiate WWII from the "hazy mists of yore" containing Waterloo and the Crusades. Even if you could pursue the subject without being relegated a social pariah, every second spent indulging it is a second not spent more fruitfully elsewhere, such as documenting the current-day activities of SJWs and communist academics (among other Shadow Party pseudopods) and researching the backgrounds of its political errand-boys (such as Frank Marshall Davis, Jr. and Soviet-asset Angela Merkel. Emphasize battles there's still a chance of winning because they're not over yet. --Froglich 01:42, 11 May 2018

See also